I DO not believe the main thrust of Ken Ivens' criticism (Gazette letters, July 28) was of the obelisks, as your heading in last week's newspaper suggested, but of the whole ethic and stomach-churning reality of the site in Salisbury Road, Marlborough.

A beautiful punctuation of open country between forest and town has been flattened and adorned with all the dreary urban clutter of everywhereville, including roundabouts, sodium lights etc. Incidentally this development was supported and promoted by a number of town councillors, telling us by implication that Marlborough's future is industrial rather than touristic.

In any event, there are no takers for units and unemployment is at such a low level that the workforce would have to be brought in from elsewhere.

I have written to Kennet District Council (the planning authority) to ask its policy position should a variation from industrial to housing or other uses be sought for this site. Planning history indicates that such a request is commonplace. Surely such a variation of consent should be refused, allowing Marlborough to promote and sustain its authentic industry, which is tourism and leisure.

M Gray

Marlborough